Timeline for One more question about PBW
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
Nov 28, 2012 at 18:20 | history | edited | DamienC | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
Nov 28, 2012 at 15:52 | answer | added | Jim Humphreys | timeline score: 5 | |
Nov 28, 2012 at 7:52 | comment | added | DamienC | I know that PBW holds whenever $k\supset\mathbb{Q}$. About my EDIT, this was just a dummy suggestion for a strategy. I was thinking about something like: if $L\to U(L)$ is injective and if PBW holds for $L\otimes_k\mathbb{K}$ (for some $\mathbb{K}$) then PBW holds for $L$ | |
Nov 27, 2012 at 23:18 | comment | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | How does $L \hookrightarrow U(L)$ reduce to the $k\supseteq \mathbb Q$ case? If $k$ is any field, then all Lie algebras over it have the PBW property. Actually, come to think of it, I think that Lie algebras always have the PBW property when $k \supseteq \mathbb Q$ — my memory is that this is proved in, for example, the article by Deligne and Morgan in QFT and Strings, but flipping through I can't find it. The idea is to prove that the canonical symmetrization map (which requires dividing by all $n!$s) is a filtered isomorphism $S(L) \to U(L)$ covering the canonical map $S(L)\to gr(U(L))$. | |
Nov 27, 2012 at 21:03 | history | asked | DamienC | CC BY-SA 3.0 |